Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675495 Jussi Lehtola <jussi.lehtola@xxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #12 from Jussi Lehtola <jussi.lehtola@xxxxxx> 2011-09-08 17:00:11 EDT --- Sources and patches are conventionally prefixed with %{name} so that they don't get mixed up in the rpm buildroot. Although this is no longer really an issue, thanks to mock, you might consider a rename. ** Your BuildRoot tag is obsolete. Please upgrade to a current version listed in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#BuildRoot_tag Or, if you are not intending to ship on EPEL-4 or EPEL-5, you can just get rid of - the BuildRoot tag - the rm -rf at the beginning of %install - the %clean section - defattr() clauses in %files ** rpmlint output: parallel.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xargs -> Argos parallel.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ppss -> poss, piss, pass parallel.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pexec -> exec, p exec, expect parallel.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US moreutils -> mutilators parallel.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary C parallel parallel.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xargs -> Argos parallel.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ppss -> poss, piss, pass parallel.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pexec -> exec, p exec, expect parallel.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US moreutils -> mutilators parallel.src: W: strange-permission parallel.spec 0600L 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 11 warnings. Well, these are all spurious. ** MUST: The spec file for the package is legible and macros are used consistently. NEEDSWORK - You are mixing macro styles: $RPM_BUILD_ROOT vs %{buildroot}. Please choose a style and stick with it. MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. OK MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. OK MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. OK MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. OK MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. OK - License is GPLv3+. MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms. OK MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. N/A MUST: Optflags are used and time stamps preserved. OK MUST: Packages containing shared library files must call ldconfig. N/A MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates or require the package that owns the directory. OK MUST: Files only listed once in %files listings. OK MUST: Debuginfo package is complete. N/A MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. OK MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. N/A MUST: All relevant items are included in %doc. Items in %doc do not affect runtime of application. OK MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. N/A MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. N/A MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix then library files ending in .so must go in a -devel package. N/A MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned, architecture dependent dependency. N/A MUST: Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives. N/A MUST: Desktop files are installed properly. N/A MUST: No file conflicts with other packages and no general names. OK - Although, I am a bit bothered by %{_bindir}/sql... SHOULD: %{?dist} tag is used in release. OK SHOULD: If the package does not include license text(s) as separate files from upstream, the packager should query upstream to include it. OK SHOULD: The package builds in mock. OK EPEL: Clean section exists. OK EPEL: Buildroot cleaned before install. OK EPEL: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'. N/A ** Please fix the style issue before git import. This package has been APPROVED PS. Since you took the time to list all the files in %{_bindir}, I'd appreciate it if you did the same thing for their man pages. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review